Skip to Content

Castle Call - A 2 player micro drafting strategy game (21 cards)


Simple games are the most complex

Those are the rules?
It is so simple and yet so brilliant at the same time.

I think the trick in your rules is the "swap hands". Here you simply know what cards you give to your opponent. There needs to be a lot of counting if you want to be a perfect player.

I have thought about the reveal card moment. Someone might suggest to keep it hidden. But I think this too is a very good choice of letting players see what their opponent plays.
They can guess their opponents strategy and also work against it in the same time.

e.g. 2nd player has a lot of blue, and lacks yellow. While you want red, you play a card with a lot of blue and red. Saving a lot of yellow for swapping to your opponent.

There might be one suggestion. But I am not sure how you think about it. It is more of an experiment I think.
What if there is a moment where you are allowed to play a card, and it is going to be placed on your opponents stack?

Thank you for feedback. In

Thank you for feedback. In testing, it seemed more fun when cards were revealed versus hidden but it does require more to think about every round.

I hadn't thought about playing a card for your opponent. How and when did you imagine that working?

I'm working on a few possible "take that" cards for alternate sets but most of the core cards have color synergy or cross synergy with your own cards.

Alternate Gameplay

The other variation I had was instead of 3 stacks, cards are played in a row on each player's side. Some cards would affect the card across as from your opponent's card so there are more tactical decisions but it's harder to track the color scores this way.

Good question on when I would see that happening.

Maybe, it can be an ability for one of your cards.

"You may switch any played card with one of your opponent. And place the 2 cards on top of their corresponding stacks."

I am not really good with these kind of rules. But what I had in mind is the following effect.

When player A plays this card. It goes to its stack, of course. But the ability of this card is a one time switch between a card of players A stacks. And one card of player B stacks. [any played card].
The cards are switched. But I know that a colour blue does not fit the yellow stack. So, they should simply go to the stack where they belong. [on top of their corresponding stacks].
There could also be confusion about their position in the stack. So, to make matters simple. [on top]

What could player A gain by playing this card?
There can be 2 reasons":
- A certain ability from another card that the opponent has. Like that, points x2 rule.
- And of course getting a gain on the colours. If you don't want red, but you do have blue. And yellow is somewhat equal to your opponents yellow stack. Then you switch your red card with one of your opponents yellow cards.

I have not seen your game. So I am unsure if picking a card from the middle of a stack, might be over powered?

JewellGames wrote:The other

JewellGames wrote:
The other variation I had was instead of 3 stacks, cards are played in a row on each player's side. Some cards would affect the card across as from your opponent's card so there are more tactical decisions but it's harder to track the color scores this way.

You could allow players to simply check their stacks that have been played? And perhaps their opponents?

Or do you rather refrain from that? There are only 9 cards to be played, right? I think players can still easily tell scores if the colours are not in stacks.
Or are you worried about those multipliers. That players don't know when to do those? If the multiplier regards a colour only. Tell the players so.

"The previous played red card has its score multiplied by 2".

Yeah, you can check the cards

Yeah, you can check the cards in any stack at any time. The only difference in stacks versus a row is stacks need to be splayed or shuffled through to see abilities quickly versus rows which always show each card. The stacks are easier to track colors but as you mentioned, it’s only 8 cards to track so it isn’t THAT hard.

Also some cards would need to be altered because a card that says red/yellow “you can play in a red or yellow stack” doesn’t work when they’re in a row. And a card that says “Adjacent cards gain +1” doesn’t have the same strategic characteristics in stacks.

I originally had it as rows but the only thing is a) players need to start from the same side and go p1 left to right and p2 right to left if cards abilities can affect opponent cards across from it or If positioning doesn’t matter at all those kind of cards don’t exist.

This really is my only last issueI need to resolve because it will dictate some of the card abilities and setup.

It should not be a problem. I

It should not be a problem.

I don't see a problem with both players starting from the same side. You could see it as the 2 players sitting in a triangle position. And the third corner is from where they build up their rows.

I hope I described it correctly what I mean.

Players would sit closer to each other too. Cozy.
And there are plenty of places where players can't sit across the table.
Like in bed or on a couch.

I updated the rules in the OP

I updated the rules in the OP and here are some of the prototype cards. Most of the abilities you see one of here will be repeated for the other colors too. I am not sure whether I'm going to put the "Your opponent card has -1 point" card in the core set. Do you guys have any better or more interesting abilities given the current rules and setup? Thanks!

I don't think that a player

I don't think that a player wants to have the red card that is worth 3 points. The negative effects are on the player itself?


Yep. It’s a non-conditional 3 points in a certain color, but it’ll be playtested at 4 points (probably final point value) as well.


I finally came up with a theme for the game. In Castle Call, players act as talent agents who manage entertainers that want to audition begore the castle's casting panel for spots in the Grand Festival's dinner show.

What do you think of the updated rules? I hope to have the revamped PnP cards (minimal/no art) completed soon.

What I like about this is that there is a COMMON theme...

It seems like your PYL micro game and this game are both about Castles. Even if different, you could maybe design THREE (3) micro games and offer them as one (1) SET of Jewell Games...

Sell it as a collection! I know you probably aren't really interested in the sales part - considering your games you have mostly been sharing them with the BGDF community. But maybe it was because you were lacking a format...

I'm just saying your micro games have a LARGER potential as being a set of games that could be played... Obviously you would need to design a "box" for the collection... Just some ideas.

I too am working on a "Micro" Deck CCG. Ya I know all the pitfalls of the CCG model. But my game focuses on the "Collectible" aspect while allowing players to play a Simple, Intuitive 30 minute game.

So wishing you the best... And also with your newborn too!

Good Idea

That's a good idea, I am trying to get a solitaire dungeon game working so maybe that'll be the third game!

Here is version 1 of the PnP cards. I'm still coming up with one of the special entertainer card abilities. If it doesn't work out, the game will just have 20 cards for now. Any feedback on the abilities?

How do you like seeing all 3 nobles consistently on the card regardless of votes versus showing only the nobles with votes and their values?

Thank you!

The desired art style of the cards would be similar to this:

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Syndicate content

blog | by Dr. Radut